True or false.
Seven-hundred and eighteen days before the 2008 presidential election, it is safe to say that the next President of the United States will be one of the following six people.
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Barack Obama
Mitt Romney
For you partisan savages waiting to pounce (and you know who you are), they are listed in alphabetic order.
So again, true or false? And then, (and this is the tough part), why?
9 comments:
David:
False, but not because you haven't picked the six most-credible candidates to lead their respective parties into November 2008.
It's not safe to say one of the six will be the next president because things happen. A fact that seems picayune now -- Obama's sweet land buy from an indicted political fundraiser, or Romney's roots in the private equity firm that wants to buy Clear Channel -- could consume them before any primary or caucus is held.
If a front-runner falls early, someone will be there to take his or her place. Among those possible candidates:
•Evan Bayh
•Jeb Bush
•Wes Clark
•Al Gore
•Mike Huckabee
•Condoleezza Rice
It's early. You know: News happens. I'd say odds are 50-50, at best, that one of the six front-runners will be elected the next president.
Easy pics... but unknowns will emerge from the field.
The day is young in electionville.
I'll say false as well. The playing field is too wide open. December 2003 Howard Dean had the money and momentum. Six weeks later he was toast.
I'll concur with the senators can't govern theory. Huckabee's a sleeper but if you listen to what he's saying to Iowans and New Hampshire voters, he's really swinging for the conservative fences.
Don't count out Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen. He was re-elected last week with 69% and all 95 counties in a state that went Bush twice, Frist twice and just elected themselves another Republican senator. He's managed to work with a Republican-held legislature and resisted efforts to create an income tax in a state that desperately needed a new source of revenue to support a health care system that was up to its eyeballs in red. But whoever has heard of Phil Bredesen?
Scratch Jeb -- I think the people have yielded a verdict on a Bush in the White House.
As people file the necessary paperwork and start their explorator process, we'll add their names to the list on the right side of the blog.
It's hard to guess how the public will react to the Clinton machine. Hillary has the most adoring press of any candidate I can remember and now she is moving on Dean to try and get more party control. She's definity the most interesting and (scary)ambitious of anybody that's running.
Dems: Progressives really don't like Hillary. With Feingold out, look for Gore to corner the left. But the Dem's hot property is Obama. He seems to be inspiring similar Camelot-like feelings among voters, for no particularly good reason, just like the last senator to be elected president: JFK.
Reps: There's a power vacuum in which the two strongest polling candidates (McCain and Giuliani) are thoroughly disliked by the people most likely to be delegates. The conservative most likely to fill the vacuum is Newt.
Ok - I'm going to go out on a limb, buck conventional wisdom and say - (despite all of your valid points) - one of these 6 will be the next President. You all make great points about sleeper candidates, that it is very early and that news will shape 2008. I agree. But I just have a hunch (ok, pure guess) it will be one of these 6.
But I love this dialogue. You are all teaching me a lot! Keep 'em coming . . .
You can razz me when I'm wrong in 700 days or so.
The last two on the list... distant "maybe" on the "well, at least they probably won't wreck America" side of the ledger.
The worst of the bunch, of course, heads the list. God help us if the Hildabeast gets her talons around a pen in the Oval Office.
Dave Plemmons, of Missouri Right to Life asked me to post this for him:
"You all have overlooked our neighbor to the west.
Sam Brownback, should he choose to make himself into an obvious candidate instead of a "maybe", would command an instant kind of gravitas because of his true conservatism.
He also has tremendous respect among liberals for his higher profile stands on international human rights issues like Darfur and sex trafficking.
Due to Allen's departure as a more viable candidate since he lost his reelection attempt, there is a void to be filled for serious conservative contenders.
McCain is too moderate for much of the base, and his lack of respect for the freedom of political speech is intolerable (McCain/Feingold).
I too am skeptical about senator's chances of winning the presidency, but you never really know."
One person to watch on the Democrat side is Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, and on the Republican side Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Some argue they are political unknowns, but at this point in the 1992 cycle, so was Bill Clinton and he went on to win the nomination in a landslide. Remember 3 out the last 4 Presidents have been a Governor at some point in their political career.
Post a Comment